Abstract
Pursuing Goal 3.1, expressed in Sect. 3.1, and bearing in mind the selection of dependent variables made in Sect. 3.3.2.1, the aim of this chapter is to evaluate the impact of the TF software development practice on PATP (Percentage of Acceptance Tests Passed) which, in turn, is NATP (Number of Acceptance Tests Passed) Number of acceptance tests passed NATP normalized by the total number of acceptance tests. As mentioned in Sect. 1.3.2.1, PATP may be viewed as an external metric of software product quality. In Experiment Accounting the effect of TF on PATP is evaluated in the context of both the SP and the PP practice (see Sect. 5.1). The two consecutive Experiments Submission and Smells&Library (analysed in Sects. 5.2 and 5.3) focused solely on the empirical evaluation of test-first solo programming (TFSP) vs. test-last solo programming (TLSP) technique. It was justified, since PP used instead of SP appeared to have a tiny impact on PATP.
There is no such thing as a failed experiment, only experiments with unexpected outcomes.
Richard Buckminster Fuller
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
H is the test statistic function with 3 degrees of freedom, and p is the significance.
- 2.
Explanation why the effect size sign do not necessarily tally with the arithmetic sign is given in Box 5.5.
- 3.
Standard abbreviations for statistical values are presented in Box 5.1.
- 4.
By convention, a negative sign is assigned to the effect size when the treatment (i.e. experimental) group performs “worse” than the control group (see Box 5.5).
- 5.
By convention, a negative sign is assigned to the effect size when the treatment (i.e. experimental) group performs “worse” than the control group, see Box 5.5.
- 6.
By convention, a negative sign is assigned to the effect size when the treatment (i.e. experimental) group performs “worse” than the control group, see Box 5.5.
- 7.
By convention, a negative sign is assigned to the effect size when the treatment (i.e. experimental) group performs “worse” than the control group (see Box 5.5).
- 8.
By convention, a negative sign is assigned to the effect size when the treatment (i.e. experimental) group performs “worse” than the control group (see Box 5.5).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Madeyski, L. (2010). Effect on the Percentage of Acceptance Tests Passed. In: Test-Driven Development. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04288-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04288-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04287-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04288-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)